Heaven and Hell

On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 3:57:58 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/21/2021 3:44 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
jbeattie writes:

On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 8:08:24 AM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
jbeattie writes:

On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 6:57:54 AM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
Jeff Liebermann writes:

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 10:18:07 +0700, John B.
wrote:

Reading your reference I had a look at the quoted study, which says in
part, "the physical properties of medical and non-medical facemasks
suggest that facemasks are ineffective to block viral particles due to
their difference in scales".

Now if you ask any competent medical authority he/she/it will agree
with that statement as the common "surgical mask" is/was never
intended to filter virus. It is intended to trap tiny droplets of
(basically) water that is expelled in the breath.

In fact I asked my cardiologist about masks and he stated that masks
are not designed, or intended, to protect you from disease but rather
as a help in you not spreading a disease. Note that "as a help".

Yep. No mask is going to stop a tiny virus particle. However, a mask
will block a virus particle riding on a water droplet or in an
aerosol. Instead of citing studies, try this experiment for yourself:

1. Breath on a hand mirror. Moisture will condense on the mirror.
2. Put on a face mask and again try to "fog" the mirror. Good luck
trying because unless you do something odd (such as cooling the mirror
in a refrigerator to help condense moisture from the air), there's not
going to be any visible fog on the mirror.
3. Try smelling something through a mask. Assuming the edges are
properly sealed, it's rather difficult to smell anything through the
mask.
When wearing a mask I frequently fog my glasses. I am not alone, many
people complain of this. I try to adjust the mask, nose wire and
whatnot to avoid the effect, because it interferes with seeing, however
I am not often completely successful.

It's true that wearing a typical mask blocks moisture transport directly
in front of the mouth, but air leaks around the edges instead, even for
those trying to do their best. For those merely aiming for visible
compliance with a rule ...
What this demonstrates is that a mask will block moisture and
aerosols, which are the major forms of transport for Covid-19. It
also works in both directions. If you have two people talking to each
other, both wearing masks, the total moisture transport will be th
product of the filter efficiency of each mask. For example, if two
masks pass 10% of the moisture, then two masks will pass only:
0.1 * 0.1 = 0.01 = 1%
which is a rather dramatic reduction.

Even a leaky mask reduces the velocity and spread of aerosols. It is
a small inconvenience and a better option than more extensive
isolation -- and reduced participation in the great American activity
of shopping in a store. My glasses fog, too, but I manage.
My comment about glasses was not a complaint -- it was an observation on
the probable effectiveness of the sort of mask I, and many others, wear.

It's not at all clear that more extensive isolation has any benefits at
all, and it's quite clear that the costs outweigh the benefits. Is a St.
Christopher medal a better option than a rabbits foot?

It is clear enough that masks help reduce spread. I linked the
studies. And isolation is -- and has been -- the best way of
preventing spread of disease. The balancing here is masks and social
distancing versus isolation, and we now have the former rather than
the latter -- or some mix with lockdowns of varying degrees.

I don't even feel like arguing about this because it just gets into a
diatribe about civil rights and fight the power, St. Christopher
medals, etc., etc. Governments make public health decisions all the
time. Are the decisions based on perfect science -- no, and they
never are, but nowadays in the current political climate, less than
perfect decision making is seen as overreach and oppression -- or more
often as some sort of conspiracy. Mask wearing is certainly a minor
inconvenience compared to some other public health decisions like
being quarantined on a cruise ship.

I think that the benefit of signaling a turn is vastly overrated and
not supported by science, and it requires me to hold my arm out, which
hurts because I have AC arthritis from a crash-caused AC separation.
I'm fighting the power and not signaling. I'm also not going to cover
my mouth when I cough -- and no more suppressing farts in elevators,
although I'm under no regulatory obligation to do so, I'm rejecting
the societal pressure and fart-shaming.

I mean if we really want to change the world, why don't we work on
getting rid of those vile automated help lines: "I'm sorry, did you
say f*** you? That is not a valid response. Please say in a few
words what it is you want. [slamming phone against desk, screaming]."

If you don't want to argue, you're always free to just not post. That's
what I do, almost all of the time.

Essentially you're telling me that I really should wear a
St. Christopher medal, because it's easier on the pocket than a rabbit's
foot, less likely to smell bad, and won't offend vegans, while
completely begging the question of how either one does any good at all.

The decisions we're seeing governments make in the name of public health
go so far beyond what would have been considered reasonable two years
ago, and are so far divorced from any kind of rational cost vs benefit
analysis that I am gobsmacked every time I read the news.

It's been extremely useful for sorting out "us" versus
"them", as was intended.

Right. The CDC was conspiring to divide the country and conquer what? Your mind? I can see them sitting around a table, looking at ways to deal with a novel virus and a brewing pandemic: "I've got it! Let's f*** with conservatives by making them wear masks!" "Oh, oh . . . [raising hand] Let's make them wear dresses . . . no, no. . . thongs!" "No, make them dress up like Carmen Miranda!" https://www.queeryme.com/display/vie...mi nwidth=330

-- Jay Beattie.

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 17:09:37 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/21/2021 4:44 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
jbeattie writes:

On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 8:08:24 AM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
jbeattie writes:

On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 6:57:54 AM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
Jeff Liebermann writes:

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 10:18:07 +0700, John B.
wrote:

Reading your reference I had a look at the quoted study, which says in
part, "the physical properties of medical and non-medical facemasks
suggest that facemasks are ineffective to block viral particles due to
their difference in scales".

Now if you ask any competent medical authority he/she/it will agree
with that statement as the common "surgical mask" is/was never
intended to filter virus. It is intended to trap tiny droplets of
(basically) water that is expelled in the breath.

In fact I asked my cardiologist about masks and he stated that masks
are not designed, or intended, to protect you from disease but rather
as a help in you not spreading a disease. Note that "as a help".

Yep. No mask is going to stop a tiny virus particle. However, a mask
will block a virus particle riding on a water droplet or in an
aerosol. Instead of citing studies, try this experiment for yourself:

1. Breath on a hand mirror. Moisture will condense on the mirror.
2. Put on a face mask and again try to "fog" the mirror. Good luck
trying because unless you do something odd (such as cooling the mirror
in a refrigerator to help condense moisture from the air), there's not
going to be any visible fog on the mirror.
3. Try smelling something through a mask. Assuming the edges are
properly sealed, it's rather difficult to smell anything through the
mask.
When wearing a mask I frequently fog my glasses. I am not alone, many
people complain of this. I try to adjust the mask, nose wire and
whatnot to avoid the effect, because it interferes with seeing, however
I am not often completely successful.

It's true that wearing a typical mask blocks moisture transport directly
in front of the mouth, but air leaks around the edges instead, even for
those trying to do their best. For those merely aiming for visible
compliance with a rule ...
What this demonstrates is that a mask will block moisture and
aerosols, which are the major forms of transport for Covid-19. It
also works in both directions. If you have two people talking to each
other, both wearing masks, the total moisture transport will be th
product of the filter efficiency of each mask. For example, if two
masks pass 10% of the moisture, then two masks will pass only:
0.1 * 0.1 = 0.01 = 1%
which is a rather dramatic reduction.

Even a leaky mask reduces the velocity and spread of aerosols. It is
a small inconvenience and a better option than more extensive
isolation -- and reduced participation in the great American activity
of shopping in a store. My glasses fog, too, but I manage.
My comment about glasses was not a complaint -- it was an observation on
the probable effectiveness of the sort of mask I, and many others, wear.

It's not at all clear that more extensive isolation has any benefits at
all, and it's quite clear that the costs outweigh the benefits. Is a St.
Christopher medal a better option than a rabbits foot?

It is clear enough that masks help reduce spread. I linked the
studies. And isolation is -- and has been -- the best way of
preventing spread of disease. The balancing here is masks and social
distancing versus isolation, and we now have the former rather than
the latter -- or some mix with lockdowns of varying degrees.

I don't even feel like arguing about this because it just gets into a
diatribe about civil rights and fight the power, St. Christopher
medals, etc., etc. Governments make public health decisions all the
time. Are the decisions based on perfect science -- no, and they
never are, but nowadays in the current political climate, less than
perfect decision making is seen as overreach and oppression -- or more
often as some sort of conspiracy. Mask wearing is certainly a minor
inconvenience compared to some other public health decisions like
being quarantined on a cruise ship.

I think that the benefit of signaling a turn is vastly overrated and
not supported by science, and it requires me to hold my arm out, which
hurts because I have AC arthritis from a crash-caused AC separation.
I'm fighting the power and not signaling. I'm also not going to cover
my mouth when I cough -- and no more suppressing farts in elevators,
although I'm under no regulatory obligation to do so, I'm rejecting
the societal pressure and fart-shaming.

I mean if we really want to change the world, why don't we work on
getting rid of those vile automated help lines: "I'm sorry, did you
say f*** you? That is not a valid response. Please say in a few
words what it is you want. [slamming phone against desk, screaming]."

If you don't want to argue, you're always free to just not post. That's
what I do, almost all of the time.

Essentially you're telling me that I really should wear a
St. Christopher medal, because it's easier on the pocket than a rabbit's
foot, less likely to smell bad, and won't offend vegans, while
completely begging the question of how either one does any good at all.

The decisions we're seeing governments make in the name of public health
go so far beyond what would have been considered reasonable two years
ago, and are so far divorced from any kind of rational cost vs benefit
analysis that I am gobsmacked every time I read the news.

Not all decisions were good, but many were. Much can be explained by the
fact that this virus was completely unknown. Measures and
recommendations changed as more was learned.

But assuming you're smarter than Tom ("There have been only 4000
deaths"), care to tell us what you would have done at what point in
time, had you been in charge?

Well, lets see... We can't make people wear masks as that interferes
with their individual freedom... we can't ban large gatherings like
churches and ball games because people don't like it... we can't make
people take an immunization shot...

Well maybe we can just brag to the world that among nations with a
population over 200,000,000 we have more Covid cases than anyone else
and Guess what, guys... more deaths too. Aren't we wonderful?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 17:17:17 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/21/2021 5:02 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/21/2021 9:48 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
jbeattie writes:

On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 2:14:44 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 1:28:54 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 12:58:28 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 8:00:25 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 7:12:26 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/19/2021 8:35 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 06:49:44 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 12:55:49 AM UTC-7,
wrote:
1979:
Q. What is the difference between Heaven and Hell?
A: In Heaven, the French are the chefs, the Italians are
the lovers, the swiss are the bankers, the Germans are
the engineers, and the British are the police.
In Hell, the Germans are the police, the British are the
cooks, the Italians are the engineers, the French are
the bankers, and the Swiss are the lovers.

2029:
Doordash are the police
Google are the engineers, the bankers, and the government
Safeway and McDonalds are the cooks
And there are no lovers, since we all live alone in 1
room apartments due to covid-26, and visiting hours were
suspended due to covid-28
This is not that far off. The latest study on masks from
Stanford University is that masks can cause pneumococcal
pneumonia. Fauci is literally murdering people to force
more and more people to use vaccines for which he has so
far earned over $9 million. Fauci actually thinks this is
funny and laughs about this in public!

Most of the posters here don't know what science is but
since they dislike my comments they will turn happily to
the dark side and kill themselves rather than take any
advice from me. Well, I can think of a few who won't be
missed in the least after they are gone.

Tommy, I believe that you are telling lies.... again. Please post a
reference to your remark that "The latest study on masks
from Stanford
University is that masks can cause pneumococcal pneumonia".

I believe that failure to do will be proof positive that you are a
liar.

The Stanford piece this week was yet another blow to the
mask religion:

https://noqreport.com/2021/04/17/sta...against-covid/

Not that anyone's religion will change from mere data.

The 'pneumonia' claim was in some other paper I did not read.
Really?
Gawd. https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...cks-evidence-/
Hmm. That article certainly sounds/reads like the kind of bunk
it purports to debunk. Putting aside the childlike style, the
first claim seems ridiculous to me - how could the mask NOT
result in less oxygen? And if it's not, why do I want to take it
off so I can breathe easier?
The Politfact article points out what is generally available on
the internet about the author and nature of the hypothesis stated
by the author -- who is not a representative of Stanford. It is
not in itself a scientific journal article.

A search of the Elsevier medical journal data base using the
search "effect! w/20 "face mask" or "surgical mask" or "personal
protective equipment"" turns up 2,538 articles. Skimming the hits,
the consensus seems to be that surgical masks help stop the spread
of droplets and aerosol from infected persons, and with social
distancing, reduce virus transmission. Poor fitting surgical masks
provide little protection to the wearer. There is evidence that
wearing a surgical mask may reduce blood oxygen levels in an
insignificant way during relatively static activities like
attending a college class. The effect is greater with higher
efforts, not surprisingly -- and with different masks.
Why are you pretending that the CDC themselves did not write an
article saying the same things? Why are you making any possible
attempt to hide the fact that masks do nothing and that there have
been studies for 40 years that all say the same thing?

This is what the CDC says about masks:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...sars-cov2.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html
Here, print yourself a poster:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...hers-Final.pdf

This study does not say that masks do
nothing. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/...mm6936a5-H.pdf
Why would the CDC recommend mask wearing if a mask did nothing? What
is in it for the CDC? The last time I checked, they did not hold
stock in J&J, 3M or the legion of other mask producers. Is it all
about the subjugation of ubermensch Tom Kunich? Are they trying to
keep you down -- you and John Galt?

As I was saying, loose fitting surgical masks provide little
protection to the wearer. A mask prevents or limits spread from the
user -- and along with social distancing reduces exposure. It is a
better version of coughing into your sleeve. Why is that so hard to
understand? Go back and slowly re-read the CDC guidance on mask
wearing. Here, again:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html

Read this, too: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2776536

For a round up of mask studies, see

https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence

My take on these, not having read them all, is that the evidence that
masks are helpful is weak. As for why the CDC would recommend mask
wearing, they're part of a government that has invested heavily in
claiming to be able to command the tide to go out. Masks are a part of
the pandemic theater.

I'm curious how you came upon an organization called Swiss Policy Research?

Did you begin by googling "masks don't work"?

When did you stop beating your wife?

I think I touched a nerve! But for an attempt at wit, you really should
have used a parallel sentence structure.

Or maybe it is O.K. to beat your wife... if you wear a mask?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 08:03:53 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 01:45:46 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 1:18:53 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 10:18:07 +0700, John B.
wrote:

Reading your reference I had a look at the quoted study, which says in
part, "the physical properties of medical and non-medical facemasks
suggest that facemasks are ineffective to block viral particles due to
their difference in scales".

Now if you ask any competent medical authority he/she/it will agree
with that statement as the common "surgical mask" is/was never
intended to filter virus. It is intended to trap tiny droplets of
(basically) water that is expelled in the breath.

In fact I asked my cardiologist about masks and he stated that masks
are not designed, or intended, to protect you from disease but rather
as a help in you not spreading a disease. Note that "as a help".

Yep. No mask is going to stop a tiny virus particle. However, a mask
will block a virus particle riding on a water droplet or in an
aerosol. Instead of citing studies, try this experiment for yourself:

1. Breath on a hand mirror. Moisture will condense on the mirror.
2. Put on a face mask and again try to "fog" the mirror. Good luck
trying because unless you do something odd (such as cooling the mirror
in a refrigerator to help condense moisture from the air), there's not
going to be any visible fog on the mirror.
3. Try smelling something through a mask. Assuming the edges are
properly sealed, it's rather difficult to smell anything through the
mask.

What this demonstrates is that a mask will block moisture and
aerosols, which are the major forms of transport for Covid-19. It
also works in both directions. If you have two people talking to each
other, both wearing masks, the total moisture transport will be the
product of the filter efficiency of each mask. For example, if two
masks pass 10% of the moisture, then two masks will pass only:
0.1 * 0.1 = 0.01 = 1%
which is a rather dramatic reduction.

I prefer the pants analogy
https://srhd.org/media/documents/PeeTest.pdf

Yes, but have you tried the pants test? The breath test can be tested
without laboratory or lavatory facilities. Also, face masks were not
designed to operate while saturated with water of urine. It doesn't
take much water to saturate a face mask. Dump one into some water,
shake off the surface droplets, and squeeze out what's left. When I
go hiking or running in the local public park, I wear a face mask. It
gets saturated rather rapidly, so I carry a spare mask or two. I've
thought that adding a sponge to the mask might help, but suspect it
would fail the fashion test.

Try holding a wet sponge up to your face...NOW INHALE!
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 08:16:41 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 07:18:39 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

Explain what moisture in your breath has to do with a strand of RNA which a virus is?

The virus rides in or on the surface of water droplets. This is the
major method of delivery. There are others.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/expert-answers/can-coronavirus-spread-food-water/faq-20485479
"The virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spreads
mainly from person to person in respiratory droplets released when
someone with the virus coughs, sneezes or talks."

"Physics of virus transmission by speaking droplets"
https://www.pnas.org/content/117/41/25209
There's quite a bit in this article on how airborne particles operate.

"Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): How is it transmitted?"
https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/coronavirus-disease-covid-19-how-is-it-transmitted
"Current evidence suggests that the main way the virus spreads is by
respiratory droplets among people who are in close contact with each
other."

In the future, please try to write something that is worth reading.

"write something that is worth reading"?? Tommy? Surely you jest.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 09:48:24 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

jbeattie writes:

On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 2:14:44 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 1:28:54 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 12:58:28 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 8:00:25 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 7:12:26 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/19/2021 8:35 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 06:49:44 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 12:55:49 AM UTC-7,
wrote:
1979:
Q. What is the difference between Heaven and Hell?
A: In Heaven, the French are the chefs, the Italians are
the lovers, the swiss are the bankers, the Germans are
the engineers, and the British are the police.
In Hell, the Germans are the police, the British are the
cooks, the Italians are the engineers, the French are
the bankers, and the Swiss are the lovers.

2029:
Doordash are the police
Google are the engineers, the bankers, and the government
Safeway and McDonalds are the cooks
And there are no lovers, since we all live alone in 1
room apartments due to covid-26, and visiting hours were
suspended due to covid-28
This is not that far off. The latest study on masks from
Stanford University is that masks can cause pneumococcal
pneumonia. Fauci is literally murdering people to force
more and more people to use vaccines for which he has so
far earned over $9 million. Fauci actually thinks this is
funny and laughs about this in public!

Most of the posters here don't know what science is but
since they dislike my comments they will turn happily to
the dark side and kill themselves rather than take any
advice from me. Well, I can think of a few who won't be
missed in the least after they are gone.

Tommy, I believe that you are telling lies.... again. Please post a
reference to your remark that "The latest study on masks
from Stanford
University is that masks can cause pneumococcal pneumonia".

I believe that failure to do will be proof positive that you are a
liar.

The Stanford piece this week was yet another blow to the
mask religion:

https://noqreport.com/2021/04/17/sta...against-covid/

Not that anyone's religion will change from mere data.

The 'pneumonia' claim was in some other paper I did not read.
Really?
Gawd. https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...cks-evidence-/
Hmm. That article certainly sounds/reads like the kind of bunk
it purports to debunk. Putting aside the childlike style, the
first claim seems ridiculous to me - how could the mask NOT
result in less oxygen? And if it's not, why do I want to take it
off so I can breathe easier?
The Politfact article points out what is generally available on
the internet about the author and nature of the hypothesis stated
by the author -- who is not a representative of Stanford. It is
not in itself a scientific journal article.

A search of the Elsevier medical journal data base using the
search "effect! w/20 "face mask" or "surgical mask" or "personal
protective equipment"" turns up 2,538 articles. Skimming the hits,
the consensus seems to be that surgical masks help stop the spread
of droplets and aerosol from infected persons, and with social
distancing, reduce virus transmission. Poor fitting surgical masks
provide little protection to the wearer. There is evidence that
wearing a surgical mask may reduce blood oxygen levels in an
insignificant way during relatively static activities like
attending a college class. The effect is greater with higher
efforts, not surprisingly -- and with different masks.
Why are you pretending that the CDC themselves did not write an
article saying the same things? Why are you making any possible
attempt to hide the fact that masks do nothing and that there have
been studies for 40 years that all say the same thing?

This is what the CDC says about masks:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...sars-cov2.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html
Here, print yourself a poster:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...hers-Final.pdf

This study does not say that masks do
nothing. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/...mm6936a5-H.pdf
Why would the CDC recommend mask wearing if a mask did nothing? What
is in it for the CDC? The last time I checked, they did not hold
stock in J&J, 3M or the legion of other mask producers. Is it all
about the subjugation of ubermensch Tom Kunich? Are they trying to
keep you down -- you and John Galt?

As I was saying, loose fitting surgical masks provide little
protection to the wearer. A mask prevents or limits spread from the
user -- and along with social distancing reduces exposure. It is a
better version of coughing into your sleeve. Why is that so hard to
understand? Go back and slowly re-read the CDC guidance on mask
wearing. Here, again:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html

Read this, too: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2776536

For a round up of mask studies, see

https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence

My take on these, not having read them all, is that the evidence that
masks are helpful is weak. As for why the CDC would recommend mask
wearing, they're part of a government that has invested heavily in
claiming to be able to command the tide to go out. Masks are a part of
the pandemic theater.

Strange then that masks are mandated in nearly every country in the
world - I think I counted something like 17 countries where mask
wearing was stated to be "only recommended or not required".
Or is that proof positive that nearly all the countries in the world
178 out of 195 are "able to command the tide to go out".
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 09:52:32 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

John B. writes:

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 13:28:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/19/2021 11:18 PM, John B. wrote:

On a personal basis I really can't see what the furor is about. Over
here you are required to wear a mask in a public place - store,
office, etc. and everybody just does it. No leaping up and down,
waving of arms and shouting, "I don't wanna do that". In fact we have
been having some Student protests about the government and even those
protesting are wear masks :-)

Well, I think many right wingers are timid and delicate. They fear that
wearing a mask may decrease their blood oxygen content by a percent, and
they quiver in fear.

More honestly, right wingers jump on even the least plausible
justification for their political posturing.

A very good friend of mine works as a civilian at a naval base.
Supposedly the commander said certain recreation facilities will not be
allowed to open until 80% of sailors are vaccinated. But many are still
refusing.

My guy said it's nuts. He says it's normal for them to be subjected to
mandatory vaccination for other maladies before shipping out, and
there's never any objection.

But like every other aspect of COVID, right wing politics trumps both
science and reasonable past practice.

I had been in the Service for more then ten years when I was sent to
Vietnam and had, of course, had shots every year for my whole time in
the service. But as preparation to my sojourn in South East Asia I got
shots on both arms and one "big one" in the butt. After I got my shirt
on and my pants pulled up the ,Medic says, "you aren't going anywhere
for the next few days are you?" And I say "Hows come?". And he says
well, after you get the plague shot (the big one in the arse) we like
you to stay around for a few days", and I say, "you mean some people
get the plague from the shot?", and he don't say nothing.

A little more seriously, I don't know about now but when I was in the
Air Force there was a regulation that you could not refuse any medical
or dental treatment that the doctor prescribed for your health.

Were you ever ordered to take any medical treatments that were not FDA
approved?

I have no idea whether any treatment that was administered to me was
approved by the FDA or not. However I had a guy working for me (in the
U.S.A.F.) who was ordered to have all his teeth pulled. When he argued
that "you can't pull my teeth" he was shown a U.S.A.F. regulation that
stated that failure to accept any medical procedure that was
prescribed by a doctor was punishable by court martial.

Now, I didn't personally see that regulation but I doubt that a
Colonel in the A.F. would lie about it. Given that regulations aren't
secret and available to anyone what wants to take the time to read
them.
--
Cheers,

John B.

Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/21/2021 5:33 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/21/2021 5:02 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/21/2021 9:48 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
jbeattie writes:

On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 2:14:44 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 1:28:54 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 12:58:28 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 8:00:25 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 7:12:26 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/19/2021 8:35 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 06:49:44 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 12:55:49 AM UTC-7,
wrote:
1979:
Q. What is the difference between Heaven and Hell?
A: In Heaven, the French are the chefs, the Italians are
the lovers, the swiss are the bankers, the Germans are
the engineers, and the British are the police.
In Hell, the Germans are the police, the British are the
cooks, the Italians are the engineers, the French are
the bankers, and the Swiss are the lovers.

2029:
Doordash are the police
Google are the engineers, the bankers, and the government
Safeway and McDonalds are the cooks
And there are no lovers, since we all live alone in 1
room apartments due to covid-26, and visiting hours were
suspended due to covid-28
This is not that far off. The latest study on masks from
Stanford University is that masks can cause pneumococcal
pneumonia. Fauci is literally murdering people to force
more and more people to use vaccines for which he has so
far earned over $9 million. Fauci actually thinks this is
funny and laughs about this in public!

Most of the posters here don't know what science is but
since they dislike my comments they will turn happily to
the dark side and kill themselves rather than take any
advice from me. Well, I can think of a few who won't be
missed in the least after they are gone.

Tommy, I believe that you are telling lies.... again. Please post a
reference to your remark that "The latest study on masks
from Stanford
University is that masks can cause pneumococcal pneumonia".

I believe that failure to do will be proof positive that you are a
liar.

The Stanford piece this week was yet another blow to the
mask religion:

https://noqreport.com/2021/04/17/sta...against-covid/

Not that anyone's religion will change from mere data.

The 'pneumonia' claim was in some other paper I did not read.
Really?
Gawd. https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...cks-evidence-/
Hmm. That article certainly sounds/reads like the kind of bunk
it purports to debunk. Putting aside the childlike style, the
first claim seems ridiculous to me - how could the mask NOT
result in less oxygen? And if it's not, why do I want to take it
off so I can breathe easier?
The Politfact article points out what is generally available on
the internet about the author and nature of the hypothesis stated
by the author -- who is not a representative of Stanford. It is
not in itself a scientific journal article.

A search of the Elsevier medical journal data base using the
search "effect! w/20 "face mask" or "surgical mask" or "personal
protective equipment"" turns up 2,538 articles. Skimming the hits,
the consensus seems to be that surgical masks help stop the spread
of droplets and aerosol from infected persons, and with social
distancing, reduce virus transmission. Poor fitting surgical masks
provide little protection to the wearer. There is evidence that
wearing a surgical mask may reduce blood oxygen levels in an
insignificant way during relatively static activities like
attending a college class. The effect is greater with higher
efforts, not surprisingly -- and with different masks.
Why are you pretending that the CDC themselves did not write an
article saying the same things? Why are you making any possible
attempt to hide the fact that masks do nothing and that there have
been studies for 40 years that all say the same thing?

This is what the CDC says about masks:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...sars-cov2.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html
Here, print yourself a poster:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...hers-Final.pdf

This study does not say that masks do
nothing. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/...mm6936a5-H.pdf
Why would the CDC recommend mask wearing if a mask did nothing? What
is in it for the CDC? The last time I checked, they did not hold
stock in J&J, 3M or the legion of other mask producers. Is it all
about the subjugation of ubermensch Tom Kunich? Are they trying to
keep you down -- you and John Galt?

As I was saying, loose fitting surgical masks provide little
protection to the wearer. A mask prevents or limits spread from the
user -- and along with social distancing reduces exposure. It is a
better version of coughing into your sleeve. Why is that so hard to
understand? Go back and slowly re-read the CDC guidance on mask
wearing. Here, again:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html

Read this, too: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2776536

For a round up of mask studies, see

https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence

My take on these, not having read them all, is that the evidence that
masks are helpful is weak. As for why the CDC would recommend mask
wearing, they're part of a government that has invested heavily in
claiming to be able to command the tide to go out. Masks are a part of
the pandemic theater.

I'm curious how you came upon an organization called Swiss Policy Research?

Did you begin by googling "masks don't work"?

When did you stop beating your wife?

I think I touched a nerve! But for an attempt at wit, you really
should have used a parallel sentence structure.

It's been said before, but you are a remarkably tedious person.

:-) And I ask inconvenient questions!

I really am curious how you found such an obscure source of
right-leaning opinion. SWPRS doesn't seem like the thing that would
turn up in normal searches, unless perhaps one indicated the direction
one was already leaning.

I don't remember. Frequently I follow links repeatedly, and have found
that if I don't mark what I find interesting it is quite hard to find
using a search engine later.

I really am curious how you categorize swprs as "right wing". There is
certainly skepticism about the worldwide covid response, is that all
there is to it? I'm not sure that's a specifically right wing position
outside the US.

I found their website valuable because it's not just unsupported
opinion, it has a wealth of links to supporting documents, and some that
are not supporting.

John B. writes:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 09:48:24 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

jbeattie writes:

On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 2:14:44 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 1:28:54 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 12:58:28 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 8:00:25 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 7:12:26 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/19/2021 8:35 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 06:49:44 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 12:55:49 AM UTC-7,
wrote:
1979:
Q. What is the difference between Heaven and Hell?
A: In Heaven, the French are the chefs, the Italians are
the lovers, the swiss are the bankers, the Germans are
the engineers, and the British are the police.
In Hell, the Germans are the police, the British are the
cooks, the Italians are the engineers, the French are
the bankers, and the Swiss are the lovers.

2029:
Doordash are the police
Google are the engineers, the bankers, and the government
Safeway and McDonalds are the cooks
And there are no lovers, since we all live alone in 1
room apartments due to covid-26, and visiting hours were
suspended due to covid-28
This is not that far off. The latest study on masks from
Stanford University is that masks can cause pneumococcal
pneumonia. Fauci is literally murdering people to force
more and more people to use vaccines for which he has so
far earned over $9 million. Fauci actually thinks this is
funny and laughs about this in public!

Most of the posters here don't know what science is but
since they dislike my comments they will turn happily to
the dark side and kill themselves rather than take any
advice from me. Well, I can think of a few who won't be
missed in the least after they are gone.

Tommy, I believe that you are telling lies.... again. Please post a
reference to your remark that "The latest study on masks
from Stanford
University is that masks can cause pneumococcal pneumonia".

I believe that failure to do will be proof positive that you are a
liar.

The Stanford piece this week was yet another blow to the
mask religion:

https://noqreport.com/2021/04/17/sta...against-covid/

Not that anyone's religion will change from mere data.

The 'pneumonia' claim was in some other paper I did not read.
Really?
Gawd. https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...cks-evidence-/
Hmm. That article certainly sounds/reads like the kind of bunk
it purports to debunk. Putting aside the childlike style, the
first claim seems ridiculous to me - how could the mask NOT
result in less oxygen? And if it's not, why do I want to take it
off so I can breathe easier?
The Politfact article points out what is generally available on
the internet about the author and nature of the hypothesis stated
by the author -- who is not a representative of Stanford. It is
not in itself a scientific journal article.

A search of the Elsevier medical journal data base using the
search "effect! w/20 "face mask" or "surgical mask" or "personal
protective equipment"" turns up 2,538 articles. Skimming the hits,
the consensus seems to be that surgical masks help stop the spread
of droplets and aerosol from infected persons, and with social
distancing, reduce virus transmission. Poor fitting surgical masks
provide little protection to the wearer. There is evidence that
wearing a surgical mask may reduce blood oxygen levels in an
insignificant way during relatively static activities like
attending a college class. The effect is greater with higher
efforts, not surprisingly -- and with different masks.
Why are you pretending that the CDC themselves did not write an
article saying the same things? Why are you making any possible
attempt to hide the fact that masks do nothing and that there have
been studies for 40 years that all say the same thing?

This is what the CDC says about masks:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...sars-cov2.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html
Here, print yourself a poster:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...hers-Final.pdf

This study does not say that masks do
nothing. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/...mm6936a5-H.pdf
Why would the CDC recommend mask wearing if a mask did nothing? What
is in it for the CDC? The last time I checked, they did not hold
stock in J&J, 3M or the legion of other mask producers. Is it all
about the subjugation of ubermensch Tom Kunich? Are they trying to
keep you down -- you and John Galt?

As I was saying, loose fitting surgical masks provide little
protection to the wearer. A mask prevents or limits spread from the
user -- and along with social distancing reduces exposure. It is a
better version of coughing into your sleeve. Why is that so hard to
understand? Go back and slowly re-read the CDC guidance on mask
wearing. Here, again:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html

Read this, too: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2776536

For a round up of mask studies, see

https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence

My take on these, not having read them all, is that the evidence that
masks are helpful is weak. As for why the CDC would recommend mask
wearing, they're part of a government that has invested heavily in
claiming to be able to command the tide to go out. Masks are a part of
the pandemic theater.

Strange then that masks are mandated in nearly every country in the
world - I think I counted something like 17 countries where mask
wearing was stated to be "only recommended or not required".
Or is that proof positive that nearly all the countries in the world
178 out of 195 are "able to command the tide to go out".

Fashion is weird and powerful -- Frank Krygowski

Anyone is able to *command* the tide to go out. Only the select few are
able to pretend that it did.

On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 5:20:04 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2021 5:42 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

I have been trying to tell you that Fauci is an incompetent bum that has NO BUSINESS on the public payroll. He NEVER served as ANY sort of medical expert save in the CDC, not from actual practice but from sitting around and reading papers written by others.

So much wrongness!

https://www.zippia.com/advice/dr-ant...uci-resume-cv/


--
- Frank Krygowski

Fauci's resume:
Increased NIAID budget from $$357 million to $5.9 billion.
Trumper Republicans automatically hate everyone who spends government money.. Unless its Trump himself who increased the subsidy payments to farmers due to his failed tariffs and to buy rural votes.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN2741D4

https://www.ewg.org/interactive-maps...%20trade%20war.

Fauci's resume:
Can run a marathon in 3 hours 37 minutes.
That is pretty impressive.